Archives
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- November 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- July 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
- January 2005
- December 2004
- October 2004
- September 2004
- January 2004
- December 2003
- October 2003
- June 2003
- January 2003
- December 2002
- June 2002
- January 2002
- January 2001
- May 2000
- April 2000
Categories
Meta
-
Yes definitely agree on this. Said only last night, at a talk on future of technology, when discussing social computing that we will see a shake-out & consolidation of social network & other social computing sites – especially now with the impetus of #GFC. And any site that makes you go meh when they remind you of their existence clearly deserves to go
-
interesting analysis, thanks.
One thing that occurred to me was your reference to the word processor market as an indicator of competitive survival, viz the observation that Microsoft Word gained momentum and achieved dominance.
WordPerfect was for a (relatively)long time the de facto market leader but I believe that it lost out to Word for one simple reason: integration.
Like many other single-purpose software products of the time,WordPerfect was positioned as the biggest beast in its own chosen jungle and very often assumed that it had absolute control not only of the commercial market but also of the operating environment on the host machine. This latter point was the key determinant to WordPerfect losing out.
Microsoft Word’s position within the Office suite offered corporate IT a great advantage, through integration of suite elements.
This fairly quickly saw the personal productivity stack in the enterprise move away from 1-2-3 + WordPerfect to Office. Game over.
As far as the present day is concerned for social networks, integration and interoperability will again be key for survival.
Likewise, sooner or later, we will have a way of storing our contact information once and connecting it to our chosen networks. I realise that there are initiatives in this area but they can’t solidify soon enough for me.
-
I agree with you about integration being the key, which begs quite a few questions. As regards WordPerfect, I remember the point when I abandoned using it was when Windows 3.0 arrived. Wordperfect’s Windows version was far too slow and Word was Windows ready. Microsoft had planned it that way, of course. I also remember that Wordperfect had a really good file management capability that Word never ever provided. C’est la vie.
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
-
[...] Bloor has blogged an interesting analysis: The culling of social networks which reviews the burgeoning plethora of networking [...]
The Culling of Social Networks
I got an email from Furl today. I’d forgotten that I had registered for Furl. I have no idea what my login details (name and password) were. I’d even forgotten that Furl actually existed. Furl just got eaten by Diigo. What the hell is Diigo? I google it and quickly discover that it’s a social bookmarking site – but I’m not going to register. It may be great. Who knows? But life is short.
We are about to witness the culling of social networks. Take a look at this list of lists, none of which are exhaustive. Every species of social networking site I can think of is there, except for RSS reading sites, which I’m not sure qualify as social networks:
The Highlander
In nearly every category there are many competitors. But in most of these categories, it’s a game of Highlander – there can only be one. In some categories, the race is over. It’s hard to see anyone displacing Facebook, Twitter, YouTube or Wikipedia. LinkedIn may be immovable too. It isn’t that other sites that do something similar cannot prosper, just as Hulu is prospering because it doesn’t really compete with YouTube. But if you can’t find an adjacent niche you’re dead meat.
Look at it another way. When the PC software market was born there were twenty or more word processors. It was highly competitive. But eventually Microsoft Word got the momentum and the competition fell away.
I’ve been tracking Google for quite a few years, watching its search market share gradually inch upwards. Google has become a habit for millions of people and its market share rises remorselessly without Google needing to do much to drive it upwards. It proceeds almost entirely by momentum.
The same is true of Twitter. It had its “near-death” experience last year with the failure of its initial software architecture and the prominence of the Whale-Fail “out of service” page, but it came through unscathed and is now uncatchable. Even if Twitter turns out to be a fad and its usage falls off significantly, it will still dominate its area.
I can sense a gradual culling of the social network sites as the big fish squeeze out the small ones. It’s happening right now. In recessionary times nobody is going to finance the also-rans of the social networking world.
I can’t even remember what Furl did.